@Narutakikun: I'd say with any of the questions you ask, it is also important to remember those who do not fit the stereotype--and any politician or marketer who assumes that "all people in San Francisco are liberal," does so at his or her own peril.

I also think that there are objective and comprehensive statistics showing that, say, 75 percent of the demographic in San Francisco votes Democrat. (I made that up, the actual statistic might be higher or lower.) Is it acceptable to ignore the voices of the other 25 percent, or 10 percent, or whatever it might be? To dehumanize them in that way?

Regardless, that's not at all what Stoklasa was doing. He was stereotyping for the purpose of degrading women and degrading 19-year-old boys solely so that he could prove his point.

@anakinfansince1983 - if you have no interest in proving or even asserting that the PT is regarded as equal or superior in quality to the OT, it seems rather odd to demand that someone making the opposite claim should provide proof.

I've not seen anyone called stupid for disliking Plinkett or liking the PT.

I never said their relationship was perfect. The point I was making is that you're claiming that their relationship is somehow on par or "just as bad" as Anakin and Padme's just to disprove my point that Anakin and Padme's relationship was unhealthy. You're dragging the OT into this in an attempt to devalue what I was saying. Which isn't going to work. Han and Leia are a non-factor in this discussion.

When did I try to disprove the fact that the Anakin and Padmé relationship had unhealthy elements? I never have. In fact, one of the major reasons I enjoy their relationship so much is because I think the PT films very accurately deconstruct the "girls want 'bad boys'" cliché so well. I can link you to a longer post of mine on the matter, if you're interested in a more extensive analysis.

I'm "dragging the OT" into this because you're calling Anakin's actions "rapey" when his behavior towards Padmé had far less of this undercurrent than did Han's in ESB. I'm asking you to present evidence that Anakin's behavior was "rapey" and how the PT glorified negative relationships. Because as far as I can tell, the movie doing that is ESB. Which is curious to me, since the "rapey" elements are ostensibly why you don't like AOTC. Or, at least, those are some of the reasons you wrote.

All I have to say to that whole post is that if you're going to create a needlessly complex political plot to drive a conflict than you'd better explain that complex political plot so that we understand what it is and why it matters. Lucas fails to do so and there are all kinds of film critics who have called him on this.

You told
@Luukeskywalker to go down the list because you had time. That's all you've got in response?

I don't get all of this. The plot of TPM was clear. Grade school history books provide info. about the effects of blockades and how wars have been waged due to taxes. The fact that some lame reviewer can't figure it out does not validate his claim.

Yeah but he raises some good questions. Naboo is a planet that looks just as lush (if not more lush) than the Earth and it has this massive energy generator doo-hickey right underneath the planet's surface. What good is a blockade going to do? Why didn't Padme just have the Jedi testify for her? How did Padme manage to overthrow a Chancellor with one vote even though the Senate really doesn't seem to care about Naboo and sides with the Trade Federation anyway? What's wrong with your faaaaace?

Ok, we might as well complain about the color of Palpatine's carpet in his office.
This type of excessive nit picking can be applied to any movie.

Quite frankly, I don't give a damn about critical acclaim. That's not an argument. If you have a response, make one, but don't try to use consensus as an argument because it won't work. Neither argumentum ad populum nor argumentum ad verecundiam will.

And

PiettsHat said:

Don't make appeals to other films, to tradition, to popularity, or to critics. Make arguments, and then we can have a discussion. And I mean that in the friendliest sense (I'm well aware that my post can come across as rather harsh, which isn't my intention).

The irony must escape you. You quoting a persons response criticizing people who post other peoples responses to films in order to validate your point..... I've already given, in three different threads, some of my reasons for criticizing the prequels. When re-posting reviews from random online sites it's done in the name of time when most of the same points I have can be quickly summarized with two clicks of the mouse. So why wouldnt you watch the last half of ROTS?

And I'm sure when I say that it wasn't funny, you'll tell me that I don't have a sense of humor.

I'm not asking you to find it funny. I don't even find it funny. All I'm saying is that you don't have to get offended by that when it's clearly a joke by a character who is clearly a reprehensible scumbag. The writers behind Plinkett don't think people who like the PT are stupid. I'm sure some of them even enjoy the PT. They were just joking and if you accept that they're being humorous when they say that then you don't have to be offended. Especially since you can't make any claims that him saying something like that is racist or sexist or whatever.

The more you bring up that point the more I feel the need to point out that Mr. Plinkett is not a real person and most of his most offensive statements are meant to make fun of the character and Original Trilogy elitists. He's a parody. He's not real.

I already addressed why I thought his actions were inappropriate earlier.

But that was kind of my point -- when Anakin acts inappropriately, the narrative calls him out on it, like the Force choke. Besides that, the only inappropriate action he takes towards Padmé is when he gives her that one look. What I'm asking is simply why his behavior towards Padmé bothers you, but not Han's behavior towards Leia, when Han also has quite a number of questionable actions towards her?

I mean, just compare their first kisses:

--Anakin nervously approaches Padmé, first touching her hand, then her back and waiting to see if he's rejected. When he's not and she looks at him, he very hesitantly leans down and kisses her until she breaks away. Then, he apologizes and moves away from her.

--In Han's case, Leia forcefully shoves him away at first and then he holds onto her hand, even after she has asked him to stop, and then presses her up against a wall and kisses her.

Regardless, that's not at all what Stoklasa was doing. He was stereotyping for the purpose of degrading women and degrading 19-year-old boys solely so that he could prove his point.

Oh, come on now. You don't honestly believe that Stoklasa said what he said for the purpose of degrading women, do you? Like he woke up the day he wrote that bit thinking: "Hmmmm... I wonder what I could possibly say to degrade women today?". I mean, I know the guy talked some smack about some movies you like, but don't you think that's reading a bit much into his motivations?

I'd say with any of the questions you ask, it is also important to remember those who do not fit the stereotype

Not necessarily. Let's say I run the aforementioned fast food chain that wants to expand into the Middle East. An understanding that, in general, the locals will be unlikely to eat in my restaurants if they offer pork products is useful - I can adjust my menu for the Middle Eastern market so that it includes no pork. Understanding that a small minority of the locals either wouldn't be bothered by pork or would actively seek it out is not important - overall success in this case requires that I cater to the vast majority, not the small minority. I can succeed nicely without the business of the small minority of those who would be more likely or just as likely to visit my restaurants if they carried pork; I cannot succeed at all without the business of the vast majority of those who would avoid my restaurants if they carried pork.

I also think that there are objective and comprehensive statistics showing that, say, 75 percent of the demographic in San Francisco votes Democrat. (I made that up, the actual statistic might be higher or lower.) Is it acceptable to ignore the voices of the other 25 percent, or 10 percent, or whatever it might be? To dehumanize them in that way?

Sure, under some circumstances. In fact, under some circumstances, you would be a fool or even a villain not to. The understanding that their product would likely not do well in a certain country because the vast majority of people there don't care for that kind of thing is something that could keep a CEO from ruining his company with an ill-advised attempt at expansion. It ignores the voice of the small minority who would buy it, but that's what you have to do in that case. The understanding that the people of a certain country just aren't going to get behind supporting a secular democracy is something that could keep a President from starting an ill-advised quagmire of a war. It ignores the voice of the small minority who would get behind it, but recent history would have gone so much better if we had...

I'm really amused because if anything the Prequel Trilogy is the series that reflects a stereotypical borderline abusive representation of women. Anakin is constantly giving Padme rapey looks, is clearly self-involved in his own problems and is bipolar to the point where he chokes his wife to death because he suspects that Padme tried to get Obi-Wan to kill him even though he should know better.

You stated this in response to anakinfan not liking that RLM uses gender stereotypes as argument. What I read from this post then, is that one (in this case, yourself) could take issue with how the PT presents relationships.

I'm asking how the PT idealizes abusive relationships (and abuse of women in general)? Or how Anakin is presented as "rapey" or his behavior of Padmé is problematic (when it's not called out as such)? If you could give me solid examples from the film, I think this would clarify things for me.

That's what I'm getting at. Because as far as I can tell, when Anakin does something bad, the narrative calls him out on it and presents it as decidedly wrong, so I don't see how it's reinforcing abusive stereotypes. Beyond this, Anakin treats Padmé well (at least in AOTC). And so my question basically comes full circle: what is it about Anakin's behavior that you felt idealized a negative portrayal? And in what way was it more questionable than Han's behavior?

And if you're assuming that I do, there is no point in us having a conversation.

I disagree. There's always a point in having a discussion (unless you've landed your spaceship inside a living creature, that's not the time to discuss anything in a committee), especially when two people disagree or misunderstand each other.

As far as why I don't watch the last half of ROTS--because it sucks. That's all the explanation anyone in a constant argument with me, needs.

I think it would give insight into why you thought the Phantom Menace was good. I thought ROTS was the only worth while film of the prequels but Lucas had already tied his hands with the first two films so he was still stuck in that framework which he thought he could escape if he threw in some burning bodies and youngling murders. From the beginning the films should have had more adult theme's/more complexity as a story explaining the greatest villain to ever be on the big screen should but Lucas wanted a cash cow so he "did it for the children" and when many of us voiced our disapproval he had a knee jerk reaction to make the last film "darker" without realizing this had to have been done from the first film on - since it wasn't the only option he had was to throw in violence that didn't match with the rest of the content in the other films. This is why I assume you wouldn't watch the last half of ROTS. I suspect you actually watched it though.

Anyhow, most of my posts on this site have centered around why the prequels should have been darker and what I actually mean by darker. So many posts that I don't really want to spend more time on it other than to say what I've already said in this thread- that is, the story of Vader was a let down (which is why I posted that review from another person saying the same thing with a tad more detail).

Re: the PT love story
There's an awkwardness in the lines and direction, the formality of speech... Definitely a lack of chemistry. George Lucas is not known as an actor's director (check out the scorn Terrence Stamp pours on him; there's an interesting interview with him on Peter Serafinowicz's radio show floating around the net), and the actors were working under unusual conditions to say the least.

That and the images that unnaturally float around the screen (with actors not making eye contact or reacting to each other) are the two largest gripes I share with the fictional character of Plinkett. They stand out even more in 3d. Hoho.

I don't think the romance story idealizes an abusive relationship. Not by a long shot. What I do think is that Lucas wrote a poorly told romantic story and while I can tell what his intentions are (because the love story is cliched) it's so poorly told and acted that it looks like the exact opposite of what it is. What Lucas might have intended was for Padme to want to be with Anakin (hence her dressing in all those revealing outfits) but knowing she can't be with him. However it's poorly worded so instead we have Padme offering all this stilted dialogue while dressed in these revealing outfits. Robot Chicken addressed that perfectly. So we're like "Wait...what?"

Then we have Anakin who is in love with Padme and has clearly been in love with her for years. Yet the dialogue is written poorly and Hayden's acting makes it come off as if he's incessantly whining about not getting any. So I get the impression that Anakin just wants to get laid.

Then we have the whole thing about him having a darkness inside of him. Yeah, sure. Ok. He's going to be Vader, I get that. Yet they express this darkness by him murdering younglings and then telling Padme. Padme who was raised on a planet where violence is heavily frowned upon. Padme who is clearly idealistic and believes in morality. This very same Padme is like "lol, well they're just Tuskens and to be angry is to be human" and she never reproaches Anakin for this. So my conclusion is that she doesn't care and frowns down upon more "basic" species. (Hence: racism). So either she's a horrible racist or she makes exceptions for a guy several years her junior and is clearly sexually repressed and immature or else he wouldn't have whined about his master so much and stared at Padme like he was undressing her with her eyes. (Which is what I meant by rapey)

Lucas could have told this story so much better. He could have told a story about a romance that was doomed from the beginning. But he goes about it all the wrong ways and as a result throws off confused pre-teens who then learn that whining about their problems and staring at girl's boobs is the way to get hitched. (I was a pre-teen when I saw AoTC and while I never bought into that philosophy I easily could have).

I think that Han and Leia's romance is frowned upon by certain people because we now live in a society that is becoming more aware of women's rights and feminist viewpoints. And I'm all for that but at the same time we have to understand that ESB was a tale told in the 1980s where the whole concept of "nice guys" and "rougish guys always getting the girls" weren't overplayed tropes to the point where they're somewhat inappropriate and somewhat sexist in the 21st century cinema.

@Narutakikun : I don't know why he stereotyped women, but I question the motives of anyone who does. If he didn't have the intention of stereotyping women, why didn't he use another argument against the love story? Are there really no more? I don't believe that.

And your marketing argument doesn't really work. The purpose of marketing is not to get every single person in an area to buy your product, but to see if a majority of the people in an area would be interested in your product. And "Judaism and Islam have an injunction against pork" isn't a stereotype, it's a fact, therefore if one takes a census that shows that the majority of people in an area practice Judaism or Islam, it would work from a marketing standpoint.

Stoklasa isn't marketing a product, and there are no census polls that show that "all women prefer men who do X."

Darth kRud said:

This is why I assume you wouldn't watch the last half of ROTS. I suspect you actually watched it though.

LOL. I watched it one time and have refused to watch it since, although it's my son's favorite Star Wars movie and he asks why I leave the room when Anakin turns into a bad guy.

I saw TPM five times in the theater and AOTC ten times.

But yes, I watched that last half once. Go ahead and play "gotcha" if you want, I suspect it will make your Saturday night, just as you "suspected" that I watched the last half.

I really don't care if it is just a character he is playing because the things he says offends me. I don't find making jokes about kidnapping women or sexism or bullying funny or art (in fact I think it is the antithesis of funny or art) so whatever points he tries to make mean nothing because I personally find that kind of "humor" (if that is what you want to call it) pathetic. When I watched his reviews I honestly had to ask myself why does he need to fill his reviews with these grotesque scenes, blatant sexist remarks and insensitive bullying remarks? Reading through this thread some have said it is to make the reviews interesting so people won't lose interest before he makes his points. Well, this is just me but I can sit through an intelligent, well thought out critism of something I personally like without becoming bored one iota (as I have done with many of the intelligent posts on this very thread) but what I don't enjoy sitting through is mindless, unfunny and offensive drivel intercut with criticism that not only fall flat (with me) but are in most instances factually wrong or someone's opinion even if it is presented by some "character". As someone who has personally witnessed the absolute worst of what bullying can do to someone, I cannot stand it in any form even if it is presented by a "character" who is trying to be "funny". Just because he is playing a character does not make it any less offensive to me but everyone is allowed to spend their time any way they choose. I'll tell you I won't be spending one second of mine in 2015 watching anything to do with RLM.

I don't think the romance story idealizes an abusive relationship. Not by a long shot. What I do think is that Lucas wrote a poorly told romantic story and while I can tell what his intentions are (because the love story is cliched) it's so poorly told and acted that it looks like the exact opposite of what it is. What Lucas might have intended was for Padme to want to be with Anakin (hence her dressing in all those revealing outfits) but knowing she can't be with him. However it's poorly worded so instead we have Padme offering all this stilted dialogue while dressed in these revealing outfits. Robot Chicken addressed that perfectly. So we're like "Wait...what?"

Then we have Anakin who is in love with Padme and has clearly been in love with her for years. Yet the dialogue is written poorly and Hayden's acting makes it come off as if he's incessantly whining about not getting any. So I get the impression that Anakin just wants to get laid.

I guess this is largely a matter of opinion, then. I had a different impression than you did and I guess it comes down to how you interpret the scenes.

Then we have the whole thing about him having a darkness inside of him. Yeah, sure. Ok. He's going to be Vader, I get that. Yet they express this darkness by him murdering younglings and then telling Padme. Padme who was raised on a planet where violence is heavily frowned upon. Padme who is clearly idealistic and believes in morality. This very same Padme is like "lol, well they're just Tuskens and to be angry is to be human" and she never reproaches Anakin for this. So my conclusion is that she doesn't care and frowns down upon more "basic" species. (Hence: racism). So either she's a horrible racist or she makes exceptions for a guy several years her junior and is clearly sexually repressed and immature or else he wouldn't have whined about his master so much and stared at Padme like he was undressing her with her eyes. (Which is what I meant by rapey)

Lucas could have told this story so much better. He could have told a story about a romance that was doomed from the beginning. But he goes about it all the wrong ways and as a result throws off confused pre-teens who then learn that whining about their problems and staring at girl's boobs is the way to get hitched. (I was a pre-teen when I saw AoTC and while I never bought into that philosophy I easily could have).

Again, I think this is largely a matter of perspective as well. But here's my reply to you from another thread (I don't know if you saw it?) which is basically how I view the romance:

I don't quite see how they're not compatible. Both of them have dedicated their lives to service and have had irregular childhoods (to say the least). In my opinion, I think Anakin was drawn to Padmé precisely because she had many of the qualities he had always longed for and missed -- a very great capacity to forgive and see the best in others, her dedication to people, the fact that she recognized him as a person even when he was a slave and she was a queen, and she was a comforting center of emotional strength for him.

Anakin clearly cared about the political system. He had dedicated his life as a Jedi to serving others. And he had helped save Padmé's planet and her very life not too long ago. Plus, he cared about her and was open with his feelings and I can imagine that Padmé is quite used to people saying one thing and meaning another, since she works as a politician. But it's more than that. Padmé has always struck me as a bit of a martyr, ready to dedicate herself to her causes, no matter the cost. When her planet is invaded, she goes back herself to reclaim it, although she's very well aware that she could be taken prisoner or executed. In AOTC, she describes how she couldn't refuse the request to serve as Senator even though she was relieved when her two terms were up. We see this again when Obi-Wan is captured and she heads off to Geonosis to try to find a diplomatic solution. Now where does Anakin fit into this?

Well, I would say that one of Padmé's problems is that she's been raised to never really do things for herself. She won't be with Anakin because he might have to give up his future for her. I think that when Anakin loses his mother and slaughters the Tuskens, on some level, it makes it easier for Padmé to justify to herself to be with him because he needs her. Then, it's not just her being selfish and going after what she wants, but Anakin clearly needs someone to help stabilize him and find his way again.

You can't forget that Padmé is well aware of Anakin's nightmares about Shmi -- how long it's been going on, Anakin's tiredness, how much he's worried about her, and Padmé was there when Cliegg Lars described what happened to Shmi. Given how Anakin reacts to what he's done -- the overwhelming guilt and pain, I can see how (in this context) she decides to keep it secret for him. It's not that she doesn't recognize what he's done is wrong, but she doesn't think he's a bad person, given the circumstances and his reactions. She wants to "heal" him is my understanding of the scene. Plus, you have to remember that Anakin didn't just tell Padmé about what he had done but he also told the Chancellor -- an authority figure -- and one of Padmé's friends. That, and Anakin was going to fight in the war to protect the Republic.

I think, to be honest, that the Anakin-Padmé romance (whether it was intended by Lucas or not) works very well as a deconstruction of the "girls want bad boys" cliché because the reason that this trope is so popular is that it's predicated on wanting to "save" the other person. Wanting love to be strong enough to support and redeem them. To give them the strength to be better. I think where the PT romance works very well is that it demonstrates that Padmé's love, while well-intentioned, is not enough on its own to get Anakin through this. He experienced an extremely traumatizing event that he doesn't really get to deal with or confront the implications of. And it re-manifests itself with disastrous consequences by ROTS. I also think the romance demonstrates the dangers of acting as someone's sole source of emotional support -- when Padmé's life is threatened and it's possible that Anakin could lose her love, he doesn't know how to handle it. And Padmé's love alone is not enough to get him through that as it is the very thing he fears losing.

Personally, I think the dynamic works very well because I can see the context for why they love each other and how that love supports them, but is weakened by their inabilities to be honest with themselves. Anakin needs to admit that he needs help and not try to pretend to be a model, detached Jedi. And Padmé needs to accept that she's not adequately equipped to help Anakin. She can be there for him, but she can't be the only thing that is keeping him balanced.

I think that Han and Leia's romance is frowned upon by certain people because we now live in a society that is becoming more aware of women's rights and feminist viewpoints. And I'm all for that but at the same time we have to understand that ESB was a tale told in the 1980s where the whole concept of "nice guys" and "rougish guys always getting the girls" weren't overplayed tropes to the point where they're somewhat inappropriate and somewhat sexist in the 21st century cinema.

I don't mind a "roguish" guy getting the girl, but I do have issues with how Han goes about it. I think it's far more problematic than Anakin and Padmé's dynamic truthfully because the narrative addresses their issues, while Han and Leia's problems are idealized.

Anakin might "undress Padmé with his eyes" (although, again, that depends on how you read the scene), but if Han tried to pull some of what he did on Leia on a lot of women today, they could easily slap him with a sexual harassment charge. Not so with Anakin, so it puzzles me that Anakin's behavior is called into question so much more than Han's in regards to this.

@Narutakikun : I don't know why he stereotyped women, but I question the motives of anyone who does. If he didn't have the intention of stereotyping women, why didn't he use another argument against the love story? Are there really no more? I don't believe that.
...

Sorry to butt in, but this is the cognitive issue again.

The fictional character Plinkett killed his wife and has a prostitute tied up in his basement. This is the character that is making the judgements in RLM's comedy review.

We are supposed to question his motives and attitude. He's revealed as a chauvinist psycho. It's a parody of obsessive fandom.